DoC Domination Challenge

[Manco Capac]

Egypt​

3000BC
Normal Speed
Monarch Diff
Vassals: Persia (deseased), Ethiopia (PVassal), Moors (PVassal), France (Cap), Spain (Cap), Russia (Cap)
Version: The last one before the present one. Don't know. I'm rookie to DoC mod.
Mode: Ironman (as suggested by Tomorrow's Dawn guy)
Added Option over Vanilla Scenario: Lock Modified Assets (Anti-Cheat protection)
Awesome Event: Free Astro from Hut. Not that it mattered because I had Lib for it.

Too late for writeup. Not sure people are interested anyways. S&Tales subforum traumatized me in lengthy discourses.

Finish Date: 1630 AD
Score: 11562

 

[Manco Capac]

I attached a save on top of it. Nothing more satisfying than a full-proof legit game.

 

[Manco Capac]

Also, I think another notice shall be added to the OP rules: Something about rolling a game with a previous civ and then swap to the civ you meant to play in order to "transfer" goodies from the collapsing to the newer one. By goodies, I define cities, units and wonders. Tech is impossible because by the time it is enabled, the swap of civs is made.

 

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

^That's already been an unspoken rule about Domination, although I believe there's at least one post in this thread talking about that.

Also, Lock Modified Assets is checked by default in DoC.

 

[Manco Capac]

Also, Lock Modified Assets is checked by default in DoC.

I don't remember this. The very first games always had that worldbuilder on. So I decided to put myself Lock Modified Assets.
I don't really know the scenario you are mentioning.

 

[Manco Capac]

^That's already been an unspoken rule about Domination, although I believe there's at least one post in this thread talking about that.

Hmm, that's pretty newbie unfriendly if not presented as a spoken rule. Imagine some person played hard its game and discovered its game is refused because the rule was lost someone in the thread.

 

[Manco Capac]

BTW, congrats to your game. Your tech rate seems impressive at a regular basis.

 

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

Thanks, I'm not on the same tier as Jusos or blizzrd though;
I can finish Domination consistently, but I can't pull it off as quickly as them.

 

[Jusos2108]

Ok, so I'll add another leaderboard for after 1.11 versions.

I also added to the first post that civ changing is not allowed to get a better starting situation.

 

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

Ok, so I'll add another leaderboard for after 1.11 versions.

I also added to the first post that civ changing is not allowed to get a better starting situation.

Thanks, so is my Ottoman game valid then?
Also, if we differentiate between 3000BC/600AD starts and 1700AD starts,
shouldn't we give that same treatment to 3000BC & 600AD starts?
Monarch & Normal will still be the standard but perhaps the starts should be separated.

 

[Jusos2108]

I'll have to think about that; I might just get rid off the 1700AD records to make things neater.

 

[blizzrd]

Can all civs even achieve domination victory after the new stability system is ready? Will domination be harder or easier with the new system? Feel free to give your opinions...

Seems likely to be a lot harder for civs with small core/historical areas. It used to be possible to buffer terrible expansion stability with other categories, now you just start losing cities randomly within your empire -- at Stable! -- just for dropping below the arbitrary threshold, not even for being unstable.

 

[blizzrd]

I also added to the first post that civ changing is not allowed to get a better starting situation.

Do the respawn civs have an exception on this?

 

[Jusos2108]

Yes, my wording is phrased that in order to get a better start. If you switch immeatidely, you can't really influence that.

 

[Manco Capac]

Out of curiosity, is there anything wrong with my game? I mean it beats the present record by several centuries and I see nothing edited about it.

But I see since yesterdey the clause about civ swapping is indeed added.

What I mean checking the validity should be zipping, I even released the save.

 

[Jusos2108]

Please read the discussion above about the stability changes, perhaps that answers your question.

 

[Manco Capac]

Seems likely to be a lot harder for civs with small core/historical areas. It used to be possible to buffer terrible expansion stability with other categories, now you just start losing cities randomly within your empire -- at Stable! -- just for dropping below the arbitrary threshold, not even for being unstable.

You just confirmed what I was afraid of. I have seen the new stability (the wording from the recent thread by Leoreth) and the first reaction I had is its additional blow on weak nations, those with small core areas.

I also don't really like the random GPeople bar loss. Seriously, a good strategic game shouldn't tend towards plentiful of RNG-based mechanics, especially randomly chosen.

 

[Tomorrow's Dawn]

^Actually, Tachywaxon's game was played on the v1.11 versions;
I read his AAR and he utilized Mercenaries to great effect.

 

[Manco Capac]

Please read the discussion above about the stability changes, perhaps that answers your question.

My game isn't with the newest SVN. How do I check my version?
All I can give is I still have mercenaries and I think there are no more in the new one.

 

[Manco Capac]

^Actually, Tachywaxon's game was played on the v1.11 versions;
I read his AAR and he utilized Mercenaries to great effect.

Again, what's an AAR? Everyone uses this term, but I'm still unsure of its meaning.

Anyways, if someone is interested in the strategy/tactics I used (besides the mercenaries being one of them), tell me. I don't sharing at all. In fact, this thread is one of the best for RFC: DoC because it has really good strategic thoughts and discussion. Something that parallels S&Tips subforum. One reason I played an ironman game for this thread.